Wow,look at the actual numbers on worldometer at the moment ..

[Layladylay234]

Current levels of infection: 7,007,039
Number of mild infections: 6,946,649 (99%)
Number of serious/critical cases: 60,390 (1%)

Do these numbers make anyone else think,what the fuck are we doing damaging the economy,our children's future and mental health for figures like this?

Current levels of infection: 7,007,039
Number of mild infections: 6,946,649 (99%)
Number of serious/critical cases: 60,390 (1%)
Do these numbers make anyone else think,what the fuck are we doing damaging the economy,our children's future and mental health for figures like this?

I'm so glad no-one actually died.

The UK figures are even better we a population of approx 65 million and yesterday 77 were in ventilator bed thats just over 0.0001% of our population.

Because of course it would stay that way if we all went back completely to normal ... 1 death on 10 March. Over 1,000 on 10 April (even with lockdown two weeks earlier).

According to Worldometer, the UK has had 352,560 confirmed cases of Coronavirus and 41,586 confirmed deaths which gives a death rate of almost 12%.

Obviously this figure would be much lower if we knew the number of true cases in the UK but still it's all too easy to dismiss until it's you or a family member that becomes a statistic.

@MH1111

Yes.

Lockdowns don’t stop the virus they just delay it. Look at France and Spain, draconian lock downs followed by exponential second waves.
We’re all going to get it (most wont even notice) We just need to take sensible actions ie Sweden’s approach

We can't do that. This country is not similar enough to Sweden.

No.

Good posts, @Derbygerbil. Your posts are always islands of reason in a great ocean of unreason. Keep doing what you're doing.

There's been 7 deaths in my town of c.27,000 people. 7. That is 7 individual tragedies but a staggeringly low number for the impact of lockdown.

The council anticipates that 25% of local jobs will go.

Only 40% of children in our local secondary did any school work during lockdown. None of the work done was marked. The school is spending the first term going over it all again, boring the pants off the kids who actually did do work.

It amazes me the number of people who try and turn things back onto the OP and put words into their mouths.

It amazes me the number of people who try and turn things back onto the OP and put words into their mouths

Such as?

But if the first lot didn't overwhelm services then why assume gradual easing will?

Because even with drastic intervention it very nearly did and the outcome was still awful. Excess deaths might not look too bad in the context of a year but to have 60,000 all in the space of three months is bordering dangerously close to unmanageable.

I wouldn’t say the NHS wasn’t overwhelmed either. Pretty much all bar emergency/urgent care was halted. Regardless of whether you feel it’s limits were pushed by our own self-imposed restrictions or the impact of covid it still happened. My partner had a cardiac event a week or so before lockdown and A&E was dead. The public restrict their own access to healthcare long before anything is imposed. The media play a part in this obviously but people also come to their own conclusions by observing what’s happening around them.

I would recommend researching accounts from people who work in the funeral industry, both the U.K. and globally, they certainly weren’t unaffected.

You lost me the second you mentioned “why can’t we just be like Sweden” ra ra. I cannot believe people are still ringing this bell. First of all, Sweden has precautions, as @SurferRona pointed out - her whole comment was spot on. And even if they didn’t...
Population density in Sweden: 25 people per kilometer
Population density in U.K.: 275 people per kilometer
You really don’t see the difference to the ease of COVID spreading, at all? Really? Right then.

@UnexpectedItemInShaggingArea

There's been 7 deaths in my town of c.27,000 people. 7. That is 7 individual tragedies but a staggeringly low number for the impact of lockdown.

The council anticipates that 25% of local jobs will go.

Only 40% of children in our local secondary did any school work during lockdown. None of the work done was marked. The school is spending the first term going over it all again, boring the pants off the kids who actually did do work.

How many actual cases did your town have?

How many were hospitalised?

How many have long Covid?

How many do you think would have died/been seriously ill/had long term illness had we not had restrictions?

@EDSGFC

But if the first lot didn't overwhelm services then why assume gradual easing will?

Because we were in lockdown. We have never allowed it to run unchecked throughout the population. We locked down to stop that happening.

Why can you not see this? You are looking at the picture during lockdown and then assuming that the same will happen without lockdown.

No I'm looking at the spike that brewed when our Prime Minister was still shaking hands publicly, and we were all merrily cramming into pubs and trains etc. Why can't you hear me? And nobody has advocated for letting anything run unchecked.

Some more maths that might interest people:
UK population: 66 000000 number died of Covid19 41,586 thats approx 0.06% of the population www.geteasysolution.com/41586-is-what-percent-of-66000000 are the calculations. I used to work in head and neck oncology every case and every death is tragic and when I was there I began to think the whole world were being diagnosed and were dying of head and neck cancer because thats all I saw and we were a specialist centre and only took the rare and often hopeless cases, the reality is that lung, bowel, breast and prostate cancers together accounted for almost half (45%) of all cancer deaths in the UK in 2017 head and neck cancer accounts for only 2%. Covid 19 is everywhere in our media so its easy to assume like me in my old job that the whole world are dying of Covid19 but in reality they're not

Just because Worldometer is nicely laid out and easy to interpret does not mean it is right.

Those tables are only as good as the information that is fed into them. That information comes from state healthcare systems that are under pressure to perform according to state leadership - which is pretty poor across the world right now. Countries need to cap their figures as low as they can. It is credible that some of these numbers are just incredible - take the death rates in the US, India, Iran and Brazil in particular.

It seems to me from published journals that had the virus lockdown and public health measures not been taken, the death rate in the UK could now be at 500,000 and possibly up to 750,000 due to Covid . At the lower end that is more than the UK military and civilian deaths of WW2.

To put it into further perspective, those 500,000 would have included significant healthcare workers, breadwinners and parents. What effect those deaths on the health and well-being of many, many more.

You posts and arguments OP look shockingly immature.

A mortality rate of 1% seems like very little. But it is, comparatively speaking, high for a contagious disease.

Yes, the majority of people who contract it will survive.

If it's not controlled there is the potential for a very high number of people to be hospitalised, and a high number of people to die. This will put a huge strain on the NHS and mortuaries, etc.

There is no need to panic, but we do need to follow the precautions as best we can.

@RightYesButNo When people ask why can't we be like Sweden they aren't saying no measures; they are saying like Sweden, which has proportionate measures. There has been social distancing, but schools were never closed. The population density is lower in the country as a whole, but it also has crowded urban areas and there is no evidence that those areas faired worse than equivalent areas in the UK. Besides, wanting to follow Sweden's example now is a totally different from saying we should have done in April. The reason Sweden is interesting is that it shows the natural life cycle of the virus when there are sensible but not draconian measures in place and it indicates that an equivalent approach would be manageable here without any massive impact. One of the reasons for this is that the virus is already endemic. That means that these measure are not designed to eradicate it. They are designed to help the NHS cope as it works itself way through the population. All we are doing is prolonging that disruption and pushing the point at which people get the virus into the winter months when there are other viruses around too and immune systems are more rundown and less able to cope. It is a huge error. We should have moved to the Swedish approach in June.

No I'm looking at the spike that brewed when our Prime Minister was still shaking hands publicly, and we were all merrily cramming into pubs and trains etc. Why can't you hear me? And nobody has advocated for letting anything run unchecked.

Because what the op, and others are calling for, never happened. We locked down early (not early enough). And people are arguing that it be allowed to run in checked. That's exactly what people want. They don't want the restrictions that we currently have so, of course that's calling for it to run un checked.

PatriciaPerch that was in part due to separation of Covid from non-coved in mortuaries. Someone who dies of a disease is still infectious after death. In the wild this is a major means of spread for many viruses, as the cadaver of one animal becomes lunch for a carnivore.

Too much focus on death being the only bad outcome. I know of someone who had to be sectioned due to Covid delirium, and now appears permanently brain damaged and will never work again, plus another person with a damaged heart, both fit, well and working prior to this, neither of them in a higher risk group.
We are not seeing the stats on people left permanently damaged post Covid, people who only had a “mild” illness.

Current worldometer projections for the UK show 400 deaths per day by January with current restrictions and 900 with an easing of restrictions. The peak is not yet shown on the graph and looks like it would be in february/march under both scenarios.

@EDSGFC

*How many actual cases did your town have?

How many were hospitalised?

How many have long Covid?

How many do you think would have died/been seriously ill/had long term illness had we not had restrictions?*

Can't find the figures for cases for my town. Regardless testing was so sparse here it hardly counts. Hardly any in hospital, single figures for most of lockdown. Yet we now have a backlog of 14,000 appointments/procedures (my husband and daughter included) that they have no idea how they are going to get through.

No one can say what the impact of no lockdown or lockdown vs other measures would have been with any certainty. No one.

@EDSGFC I can find the number of cases in the last week in my town and it's less than 10.

[quote Peony9876]It is the mild cases that typically go on to experience long covid with a variety of neurological and cardiovascular symptoms
covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-long-term[/quote]
I have long covid. I'd rather have it than the economy be destroyed